Secret evidence
which might have been obtained by torture cannot be used against terror
suspects in UK courts, the law lords have ruled.

The ruling means Home Secretary Charles
Clarke will have to review all cases where evidence from other countries
might have been obtained in this way.

It is a victory for eight men who had been held without
charge.

Mr Clarke said he accepted the ruling and it would
have "no bearing" on government efforts to combat terror.

He said the government did not use evidence it knew
or suspected had been obtained by torture but the ruling had clarified the
appropriate legal test of what was admissable.

Human rights

Thursday's ruling centres on how far the government
must go to show improper methods if obtaining information from suspects
have not been used.

An independent judiciary has once again been more
effective in defending individual rights than this government

Sir Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrats

The Court of Appeal ruled last year that such evidence
could be used if UK authorities had no involvement.

But eight of the 10 foreign terror suspects who were
being held without charge, backed by human rights groups, challenged that
ruling.

They argued evidence obtained in US detention camps
should be excluded from court hearings.

It is thought some of the eight men are being held
in Belmarsh prison, pending deportation, some released on bail and others
restricted by the government's new control orders. The Home Office will
not confirm precise figures.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) must
now investigate whether evidence against the suspects facing deportation
was obtained by torture.

'Hypothetical'

The home secretary said the government had not been
planning to rely on evidence it knew or suspected had been obtained under
torture.

He said he did not expect the ruling to affect the
outcome of the men's appeals.

Mr Clarke said: "We have always made clear that
we do not intend to rely on or present evidence in SIAC, which we know or
believe to have been obtained by torture. So this issue is hypothetical."

Quoting one of the law lords' judgements, Mr Clarke
said it was "one thing to condemn torture as we all do" but another
to "find a solution to the question that this case raises which occupies
the moral high ground but at the same time serves the public interest and
is practicable".

'Abhorrence'

The law lords' unanimous finding that the men's appeal
should be allowed began with a forthright condemnation of torture by Lord
Bingham, the former Lord Chief Justice, who headed the panel of seven law
lords.

He said the English law had regarded "torture
and its fruits" with abhorrence for over 500 years.

"I am startled, even a little dismayed, at the
suggestion (and the acceptance by the Court of Appeal majority) that this
deeply-rooted tradition and an international obligation solemnly and explicitly
undertaken can be overridden by a statute and a procedural rule which make
no mention of torture at all."

Another member of the panel, Lord Carswell said: "The
duty not to countenance the use of torture by admission of evidence in judicial
proceedings must be regarded as paramount and to allow its admission would
shock the conscience, abuse or degrade the proceedings and involve the state
in moral defilement."

'Momentous'

Conservative shadow attorney general Dominic Grieve
said the judgement was "a completely correct restatement of a law that
has existed for hundreds of years".

Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell
said it was a "landmark judgement", which would have implications
for other cases coming before the courts.

He said it showed "an independent judiciary has
once again been more effective in defending individual rights than this
government".

Amnesty International said the "momentous"
ruling overturned the "tacit belief that torture can be condoned under
certain circumstances".

Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil rights pressure
group Liberty, said: "This is an important message about what distinguishes
us from dictators and terrorists.

"We will not legitimise evidence obtained by torture
by using it in our justice system."

Get Alex Jones
and Paul Joseph Watson's books, ALL Alex's documentary films, films by other
authors, audio interviews and special reports. Sign up at Prison Planet.tv
- CLICK HERE.